Good point, but shouldn't be too surprising based on Sprint's incredibly poor use of tech investment in the past. Example: $3.3 billion for ION - and then dropped the initiative abruptly without getting ANYTHING out of the investment. $39 billion for Nextel - and then failing to integrate, thus having to spend additional billions for re-band (government mandate) THEN announcing (for the second time) they were integrating push-to-talk into the CDMA network. After years and years... After there's no longer any real market for it (which Verizon found out itself in 2005 before relegating its offering to the, "mehhhh" category) GlobalOne anyone? Buying Forsee out of a Bell South non-compete? ...etc...
Hesse bases Sprints future on increaded debt, another Moody's debt rating cut, limited spectrum and LightSquared upcoming train wreck?
Is this how a compentent CEO acts and how a Sprint board conducts their due diligence?
At some point the SEC needs to review the recent actions of Sprint executives and the Sprint board, since neither group is looking out for the welfare of Sprint investors, much less the welfare of Sprint.